The company I work for has looked a couple of times at the options of flying Chinese workers between Argentina and China via NZ with AIR. It has never been a real option due to stopover times to some degree but more due to the difficult transit visa requirements for Chinese passport holders in NZ, particularly if you may need to change dates as we often do. Until those requirements are made easier and smoother, Luxton's dream of making Auckland a hub between China and South America will never happen.
So they continue to fly via Europe on longer flights with equally long stopever at times. Crazy really.
The company I work for has looked a couple of times at the options of flying Chinese workers between Argentina and China via NZ with AIR. It has never been a real option due to stopover times to some degree but more due to the difficult transit visa requirements for Chinese passport holders in NZ, particularly if you may need to change dates as we often do. Until those requirements are made easier and smoother, Luxton's dream of making Auckland a hub between China and South America will never happen.
So they continue to fly via Europe on longer flights with equally long stopever at times. Crazy really.
Isn't the market sending a signal that this isn't business worth doing?
At some significant cost to shareholders ...and of course taxpayers.
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
Isn't the market sending a signal that this isn't business worth doing?
At some significant cost to shareholders ...and of course taxpayers.
If your question relates to NZ being a hub between SE Asia and South America, then I disagree. I think it is potentially a big and profitable business for AIR but the regulatory frameworks with slots and competition in China and visa requirements in NZ make it impossible.
If your question relates to NZ being a hub between SE Asia and South America, then I disagree. I think it is potentially a big and profitable business for AIR but the regulatory frameworks with slots and competition in China and visa requirements in NZ make it impossible.
That wasn’t the question but agree if AIR can wangle that Southern Link as part of that Belt and Road thing it could be huge for them.
Maybe that’s why they still hang in there ...hoping
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
That wasn’t the question but agree if AIR can wangle that Southern Link as part of that Belt and Road thing it could be huge for them.
Maybe that’s why they still hang in there ...hoping
Chris Luxon assured investors in the most recent call all routes were currently profitable so the "we've lost $100m in 13 years" statement may just be a convenient way to apply commercial pressure and who knows when those losses actually occurred.
Ecclesiastes 11:2: “Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.”
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
Chris Luxon assured investors in the most recent call all routes were currently profitable so the "we've lost $100m in 13 years" statement may just be a convenient way to apply commercial pressure and who knows when those losses actually occurred.
Luxon and his Prime Ministers Business Advisory Council don’t seem to be doing much for SME in New Zealand
However the main game was probably to get the PM to do things for big business like AIR ....that’s good for shareholders if she can make things happen
PS — The big boys like AIR, Fonterra and Bunnings going to double their spend and time on staff training by 2025 ...that’s a good start
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
The China operation is very much worthwhile for Air NZ and operationally it is profitable.
Cargo revenue generated via the route is, as I am told, not apportioned to the route itself however that aside the key issue is and always has been the time on the ground in PVG. Resolve this and you instantly will have a profitable route.
This was the very same issue that caused the Haneda pull out.
Originally Posted by winner69
Isn't the market sending a signal that this isn't business worth doing?
At some significant cost to shareholders ...and of course taxpayers.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by winner69
Bookmarks